- » Aims and Scope
- » Journal Sections
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer Review Process
- » Indexation
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Plagiarism Policy
- » AI Use Policy
- » Founder
- » Author Fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Preprint and Postprint Policy
- » Informed Consent Statement
- » Human and Animal Rights
- » Data Sharing Policy
- » CrossMark Policy
- » Advertising Policy
Aims and Scope
Innovative Medicine of Kuban publishes results of experimental and clinical research, case reports, and reviews in fields of cardiothoracic surgery, oncological urology, vertebrology, vascular surgery, transplant medicine, etc. We also accept papers on research and clinical practice in regenerative medicine and cellular technologies. What we look for in manuscripts are synergy of researchers, physicians, and laboratory scientists’ work and implementation of research findings in practice. The Journal publishes articles by authors from the founder institution (20% of all published articles) and by Russian and foreign authors (80%).
The quality of submitted manuscripts is the main criterion in selection of papers for publication. We tend to favor studies that follow principles of evidence-based medicine and a multidisciplinary approach.
Innovative Medicine of Kuban is aimed at a wide range of specialists: cardiologists, cardiovascular surgeons, pulmonologists, neurosurgeons, neurologists, intensivists, sonographers, urologists, traumatologists, orthopedists, and oncologists.
Journal Sections
Open Submissions
IndexedPublication Frequency
4 times a year
Open Access Policy
Innovative Medicine of Kuban is an open access journal. All papers are immediately accessible upon publication to readers, free of charge to promote global knowledge exchange.
Our Open Access Policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition. It means that articles are freely available on the public internet, which permits any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.
For more information, please read the BOAI Declaration.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer Review Process
1. The editorial staff of Innovative Medicine of Kuban conducts internal and external evaluation of all submitted manuscripts.
2. Manuscript are assessed by internal experts (Editor in Chief and Executive Editor) and checked for accompanying documents, plagiarism and self-plagiarism, and compliance with the Journal’s scope, Author Guidelines, ethical standards. At this stage, a manuscript could be returned to authors for revision, eg, to format the manuscript following the Author Guidelines or to remove incorrectly quoted fragments. The initial evaluation of a manuscript lasts 3 days.
3. The Journal uses double-blind peer review, ie, both the reviewer and author identities are concealed from the reviewers, and vice versa.
Each manuscript is sent to 2 reviewers: members of the Editorial Board, Editorial Council, or guest experts in the appropriate field of medicine. The reviewers are highly qualified experts with relevant publications within the last 5 years. The Editor in Chief selects reviewers. All original articles are also reviewed by the Statistical Editor.
Upon receiving a manuscript, the reviewer should confirm their readiness to prepare a review within a month in a reply email.
When evaluating the paper, reviewers are expected to follow the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers and Ethical Policy of Innovative Medicine of Kuban.
In case of a conflict of interest, the reviewer has the right to refuse to review the manuscript. The reviewer may also decline to review the manuscript if they feel they have insufficient expertise.
Manuscripts are reviewed on a voluntary and gratuitous basis.
4. After reviewing the manuscript, experts give one of the following recommendations:
– The article is recommended for publication;
– The article requires revisions and a re-review;
– The article cannot be accepted for publication;
– The article cannot be accepted for publication.
Authors are given no more than a month to revise their manuscript. If they fail to send the revised paper within a month, the editorial staff removes the article from the register and notifies authors of this.
In conflict situations, the Editor-in-Chief makes the final decision. The decision to reject the paper is made by the Editor in Chief and Editorial Board members. The paper not recommended for publication by more than one reviewer will not be reconsidered.
After the article is accepted, the editorial staff notifies authors and specifies the terms of publication.
5. Original files of review are kept in the editorial office for 3 years and, if requested, can be sent to the Higher Attestation Commission of the Russian Federation or the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation.
Indexation
Articles in Innovative Medicine of Kuban are included in systems for calculation of authors and journals’ citation indices. A citation index is a numerical measure that characterizes the impact of an article and is calculated from the number of subsequent publications that cite this article.
Innovative Medicine of Kuban is indexed by the following systems:
- DOAJ
- Russian Scientific Citation Index (RSCI): a database that accumulates information on papers by Russian researchers in Russian and foreign journals. The RSCI project has been developing by Electronic Scientific Library Foundation (ru) since 2005. By 2012, eLIBRARY.ru has hosted more than 2400 Russian journals.
- Google Scholar: a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. The Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online journals of Europe and America's largest scholarly publishers.
- Crossref
- Socionet
- Dimensions
- CyberLeninka
- WorldCat
- Research4Life
- Scopus
Publishing Ethics
The Publishing Ethics of Innovative Medicine of Kuban are based on the following international and Russian documents, standards, and guidelines:
3) the latest versions of the COPE guidelines;
5) Kleinert S, Wager E. Responsible Research Publication: International Standard for Editors (2011).
I. Editors’ Responsibilities
Editorial Decision
The editorial staff of Innovative Medicine of Kuban adhere to generally accepted principles of the scientific approach, impartiality, fairness, and integrity in scientific research. Editors’ decisions to accept or reject a paper are based only on the paper’s importance, originality, and clarity, and the study’s relevance to the Journal’s scope.
Editors are responsible for monitoring the turnaround time for every publishing stage from manuscript receipt to publication or rejection and listing the dates of manuscript receipt, revision, and acceptance as part of the published article.
Articles of the Editorial Board/Council members of Innovative Medicine of Kuban are considered for publication on a priority basis.
Manuscript Review
Editors are responsible for ensuring a fair, unbiased, professional, and timely review process to provide constructive and informative critique of the submitted paper.
Innovative Medicine of Kuban uses a double-blind peer review process, which means that the author's personal data are concealed from the reviewer, and vice versa.
Editors at their own discretion may sometimes reject a manuscript without external peer review if the paper is outside the Journal’s scope and lacks originality.
Confidentiality
The submitted manuscript is treated as a confidential document and shared only with those involved in the evaluation, review, and publication processes.
The editorial staff collects only authors’ personal data (full name, academic title and rank, affiliations and addresses, and contact information) required for publishing and indexing the Journal in the Russian Science Citation Index and Crossref databases.
The editorial staff ensures that peer reviewers’ identities are protected during manuscript evaluation and communication with authors.
Conflict of Interest
The CSE’s White Paper defines the conflict of interests as conditions in which an individual holds conflicting or competing interests that could bias editorial decisions. Editors of Innovative Medicine of Kuban encourage all participants of the publication process, including the editorial staff, authors, and reviewers, to disclose potential and factual conflicts of interest, including personal, financial, or nonfinancial ones, which can affect editorial decisions.
All potential members of the Editorial Board/Council should provide the editors of Innovative Medicine of Kuban with information on all potential and factual conflicts of interest (eg, any activity concerning the publication of scientific journals and books, membership in the editorial boards/councils of other journals, as well as any other conflicts of interest).
Identification of Research Misconduct
Editors of Innovative Medicine of Kuban interpret research misconduct as mistreatment of research subjects and purposeful manipulation of the scientific data (fabrication, falsification, and plagiarism) (based on the CSE’s definition). Another form of research misconduct is citation manipulation: eg, self-citation or citation swapping if such citations do not add significantly to the scholarly content of the manuscript.
Research misconduct does not include honest error. Poor-quality research is not considered misconduct unless the investigators used poor-quality methods with the intention to deceive.
If editors or reviewers suspect research misconduct, the peer review process should be suspended until the issue is resolved. The editor notifies the corresponding author of the issue and requires clarification. If the author’s response is not satisfactory, editors reserve the right to notify the employing institution because the institution typically has access to the source material. In complicated cases usually involving data manipulation editors seek expert advice from the Ethics Board of the Association of Science Editors and Publishers.
Mistreatment of Research Subjects
Researchers have an obligation to the subjects they study whether they are humans or animals and whether the entire organism or just specimens are being studied (see V, Author Guidelines). The following are examples of research misconduct:
– Failure to comply with the provisions of the World Medical Association's (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects, European Convention for the Protection of Vertebrate Animals Used for Experimental and Other Scientific Purposes
– Failure to obtain approval from an ethical review board before starting the study; conducting the clinical trial without its registration in a relevant healthcare government organization (Federal Service for Surveillance in Healthcare [Roszdravnadzor] and its regional offices)
– Failure to follow the approved protocol during the conduct of the study
– Absence of informed consent of human participants
– Breach of confidentiality of human participants (with respect to case reports)
– Absence of information on patents for inventions.
Where necessary, editors have the right to seek clarification from authors in relation to ethical aspects of the study (eg, how informed consent was obtained or what methods to reduce animal suffering were used).
Data Manipulation
The editorial staff diligently works with manuscript texts to prevent papers containing plagiarism, falsified and fabricated data from being published in the Journal (Declaration of Ethical Principles of Science Publications by the Association of Science Editors and Publishers).
If the study was not conducted, and its data were invented, this is called fabrication. Falsification refers to the alteration of information on research subjects, equipment, protocols, data, or results (eg, selective rejection of undesired results, deliberate misuse of statistics). The severity of the described research misconduct lies in inaccurate reflection of observed phenomena.
Fraudulent image manipulation is also an example of falsification. It involves adjustment of image data that affects the interpretation of the results. If inappropriate image adjustment is suspected, reviewers or editors may request original images from authors.
Quality Control After Publication
Editors have a responsibility to reveal cases of research misconduct in both published and unpublished papers and, if appropriate, follow COPE flowcharts and guidelines.
To maintain the reliability of published scientific data, editors correct mistakes as soon as possible or publish corrections that are critical for interpretation of research results. If there are any concerns about the validity of published research findings, such papers are double-checked and retracted in case of serious violations.
Retraction refers to a withdrawal of a published article through a formal statement made by an author, editor, or publisher. Retractions may be requested by an article’s author(s), by readers, or by editors. Retraction notices should include full citation data of the publication and clearly state reasons for retraction, which could be the following: wrong research data as a result of major error, lack of statistical analysis, research misconduct, research duplication (redundant publication), copyright infringement claims on the whole paper or its sections expressed by third parties.
The retraction procedure is carried out in accordance with COPE Retraction Guidelines (2019) and Russian Association of Science Editors and Publishers Ethics Council's Rules for Withdrawal (Retraction) of a Published Article. The retracted article continues to be publicly available, but its new status is clearly indicated by the RETRACTED watermark. The retraction notice, reason for retraction, and complete citation reference of the retracted article are sent to the National Electronic Library, the Russian Association of Science Editors and Publishers Council, and CyberLeninka.
Correction and Retraction Policy
- Retraction is a withdrawal of a published article through a formal statement made by an author, editor, or publisher in order to correct data and ensure the reliability of published data.
- Following the request, editors initiate investigation to clarify whether there is conclusive evidence to issue article retraction. An article may be retracted for the following reasons:
– It contains plagiarism
– The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution to previous sources (cases of duplicate or redundant publication)
– The data was fabricated or falsified
– It contains seriously flawed or erroneous content or data that change the significance of the results
– It has been published on the basis of a compromised or manipulated peer review process
– The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest
– Copyright has been infringed.
- In case of minor violations, such as lack of some sources in references, misprints, or miscalculations, the author(s) must correct the manuscript as soon as possible. The Journal publishes a correction notice and posts a corrected article version on the website, detailing the date the revisions were made. All the article’s versions are supported by Crossmark (Crossref service). Information on article revision is sent to the National Electronic Library, the Russian Association of Science Editors and Publishers, and CyberLeninka.
- In case of major violations of the publishing ethics (see paragraph 2), the article is to be retracted. Editors negotiate with authors and attempt to agree on the wording of the reason for retraction. The retraction procedure is carried out in accordance with COPE Retraction Guidelines (2019)and Russian Association of Science Editors and Publishers Ethics Council's Rules for Withdrawal (Retraction) of a Published Article.
The retracted article remains publicly available, and the ‘RETRACTED’ watermark is added to every page of the article. Retraction notice is published in the subsequent issue of the Journal, mentions the date, the reason(s) for retraction, and state who is retracting the article. The retraction notice, reason(s) for retraction, and complete citation reference of the retracted article is sent to the National Electronic Library (elibrary.ru), the Russian Association of Science Editors and Publishers Council, and CyberLeninka.
II. Authors’ Responsibilities
Authorship Criteria and Violation of Authorship Responsibility
International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) defines authors as persons who meet all of the following criteria:
1) Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work
2) Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content
3) Final approval of the version to be published
4) Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Identification of authors and other contributors is the responsibility of researchers, not editors. We encourage authors of original research articles to describe their specific contribution to the manuscript. This information will be published in the article.
The order in which authors are listed should depend on the author’s contribution to research and manuscript writing notwithstanding their position, academic rank, and other statuses. Disagreements about the author order should be resolved by authors before manuscript submission.
As stated in COPE Changes in Authorship flowcharts, all authors should agree to make any changes to the author byline both before and after publication.
Persons who contributed to the paper but whose contributions were not sufficient to warrant authorship should be named in the Acknowledgments section. Prior to that authors should obtain consent from these individuals for making their names public.
It is prohibited for persons who do not meet authorship criteria to be listed as authors. Authorship abuses include guest authorship (based on an expectation that inclusion of a particular name will improve the chances that the manuscript will be published or increase the perceived status of the publication), honorary or gift authorship (tenuous affiliation with a study), ghost authorship (authors participate in the research, data analysis, and writing of a paper but are not named in the author byline). Such behavior is unethical and may conceal an existing conflict of interests as pharmaceutical or device companies may act as ghost authors.
In case of suspected authorship manipulation, editors follow appropriate COPE flowcharts.
Copyright
Innovative Medicine of Kuban enters into a licensing agreement with authors. In doing so, the authors convey to the Journal a nonexclusive copyright license, including the right of the first publication. At the same time, the paper is being licensed on the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 that allows others to distribute this content with the obligatory attribution to the author(s) and the publication’s title and the journal citation.
Quality and Originality of a Submitted Manuscript
A manuscript submitted to Innovative Medicine of Kuban should be prepared according to the Author Guidelines.
Authors should present their results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate data manipulation (Responsible Research Publication: International Standards for Authors). Authors should properly cite sources and include all publications which their paper is based on in the reference list.
The submitted manuscript should be original and should not have been published elsewhere before. It is not acceptable for authors to submit a manuscript to several journals at the same time, including a manuscript undergoing peer review that has not been formally rejected by the original journal to which the manuscript was submitted. The CSE described a special procedure for such cases. Thus, if authors want to submit their article to another journal while it is under consideration elsewhere, then they must send formal notification to the editor of the journal in which it is under consideration, requesting that their study be withdrawn from further consideration. All coauthors must agree to the request for withdrawal. The editor sends to the author formal notification on the manuscript withdrawal. Afterward the authors may submit their manuscript elsewhere.
Copyrighted material (eg, tables or figures) should be reproduced only with appropriate permission and acknowledgment (Responsible Research Publication: International Standards for Authors). It is also applicable for authors’ own publications if the other publisher or journal retains the copyright for them. Authors should contact the journal or publisher of the material and obtain permission to reuse it.
Data Access and Retention
The editorial staff may request raw data of the research from authors. Authors should be ready to provide access to this information and store such data for 5 years after publication.
Confidentiality
The author-editor relationship is founded on confidentiality. Authors should hold all communication with editors in confidence, having designated in advance a specific contact for all communication on peer review and publication processes.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
Editors encourage authors to disclose all financial and nonfinancial conflicts of interest and mention in the manuscript those that might affect interpretation of findings by readers. Conflict of interest is not considered a reason for manuscript rejection.
Authors should disclose all sources of funding (government, corporate, other) and any products or services provided by third parties in the course of research, analysis, or reporting. It is also important to specify the sponsor’s role in manuscript development or state that the sponsor did not participate in this.
Ethical Research Conduct. Personal Data Protection
Authors are expected to state in the manuscript that the research protocol was approved by relevant institutional review boards or ethics committees before starting the study and that all human participants provided appropriate informed consent (see IV, Author Guidelines).
If the manuscript is a case report that is supposed to reveal any personal data of human participants, it is necessary to obtain written informed consent of the patient for data publication. If the patient is deceased, their legal representative should give such permission. Even after obtaining informed consent, authors should remove all unnecessary personal details from the paper that do not affect research integrity.
Editors do not collect all completed forms but encourage authors to familiarize themselves with a Consent Form for Publication of Patient-related Data to ensure that the form, which has been signed by the patient or a legal guardian, contains all the key elements. The form is based on the Journals’ Best Practices for Ensuring Consent for Publishing Medical Case Reports.
Significant Errors in Publications
Authors should inform the editor of an error in a paper (whether submitted, accepted for publication, or already published) and help correct the information or retract the article.
III. Reviewers’ Responsibilities
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Reviewers contribute significantly to editorial decisions at every publishing stage. Expert reviews assist the editorial staff in defining research value and making a final decision regarding a manuscript. While assessing a manuscript, experts should follow the COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
Sense of Duty
Editors of Innovative Medicine of Kuban expect reviewers to prepare a review within a month from manuscript receipt. It is not allowed to unduly delay the review process. The reviewer should notify the editor immediately if they are unable to complete a review on time due to objective or subjective reasons. In such a case, we encourage the reviewer to make suggestions for alternative reviewers.
Reviewers who realize that their expertise on the subject of the manuscript is limited have a responsibility to make their degree of competence clear to the editor. The expert should agree to review only if they have adequate expertise to provide authoritative assessment.
Impartiality
A review should contain objective comments on manuscript's strengths and scientific merit and provide a thoughtful and informative critique of the submitted material. Clarity of presentation, manuscript structure, its originality, and the relevance to the Journal’s aims and scope are the key points to be assessed by a reviewer. Reviewers should inform editors of any suspected research misconduct: eg, any violation of ethical treatment of animal subjects. The review should be concluded with a recommendation to accept or reject the submitted paper. Another option is to accept the manuscript after revision and re-review. In such case, experts are encouraged to indicate ways of improving the paper.
Although the review is confidential, all comments should be courteous and free from personal criticism.
Confidentiality
Reviewers should not share, discuss with third parties, or disclose information from the paper under review. It is strictly prohibited to use the paper’s content for any purpose unrelated to the review process. The reviewer should not contact the author even if their identity is no longer secret (in case of articles on a narrow topic).
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Editors require reviewers to disclose any potential personal or financial competing interests and recuse themselves if they cannot provide an unbiased review, have strong feelings to a specific topic, and are biased against the manuscript. Experts should ask the editorial staff whether a given manuscript could cause a conflict of interest.
Acknowledgment of Sources
While evaluating a manuscript, reviewers should notice cases of data falsification, fabrication, or plagiarism and indicate them in the comments. Reviewers should ensure that findings of previously published research are accompanied by references and should immediately notify the editor of duplicate publication.
Plagiarism Policy
After manuscript receipt, the editorial staff evaluates the text to detect plagiarized content via a plagiarism detection software (Antiplagiat). The editorial staff conducts a thorough expert analysis of a report on the presence of a reused text. Each case of borrowing is considered and evaluated on an individual basis. Authors should appropriately indicate text fragments from the other works. The primary source should be cited.
Editors of Innovative Medicine of Kuban define plagiarism as a word-for-word or rephrased presentation of the published text, as well as copying of images, figures, and tables from the works of other authors without proper citation; researchers’ duplication of their own previously published works without acknowledgment (referred to as self-plagiarism or duplicate publication). Widely used phrases (general scientific and common vocabulary), special terms, and standard syntactic constructions are not considered plagiarism.
The main forms of citation manipulation are failure to identify primary sources, absence of in-text citation of sources from the reference list, and excessive citation (if there are references to sources) which are not justified by the genre and the purpose of an article.
Editors of Innovative Medicine of Kuban consider each case of text recycling (self-plagiarism) in the submitted paper on an individual basis to assess the relevance of the text reusing. The manuscript section containing the recycled text is important. Thus, according to Text Recycling Guidelines (BioMed Central), some degree of text recycling in the Background/Introduction and Materials and Methods sections is unavoidable (fair citation), whereas it is almost always unacceptable in the Results and Discussion sections.
Cases of self-mentioning are allowed by the editorial staff and are considered an academic tool providing research continuity. Authors can indicate their own papers in which the issue relevant to the present research is considered from different perspectives. Usually, there is no need for a word-for-word citation or text reusing.
If the editorial staff detects large fragments of plagiarized content that call into question the scientific significance of a manuscript or discovers that results of applying manipulated techniques to cheat the plagiarism software, acceptance of a manuscript may be revoked. Authors will be notified of their manuscript rejection due to the publishing ethics violation.
AI Use Policy
In response to the rapid development of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted technologies and widespread use of generative AI in scientific writing the editorial team of Innovative Medicine of Kuban prepared an AI use policy guided by recommendations of International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME):
- AI cannot be listed as an author or coathour as it does not meet the ICMJE authorship criteria.
- Authors should disclose whether they used AI-assisted technologies (such as chatbots, Large Language Models, or image creators) in the production of submitted work and transparently describe what technology was used and how they used it:
- If AI was used for improving language and readability, describe this in the Acknowledgment section; if AI was used to conduct the study (data collection and analysis, generation of figures or computer codes), describe this use in the Materials and Methods section;
- Report the name, version, and developer of the AI tool(s) used (eg, ChatGPT, version as of September 25, based on GPT-4, developed by OpenAI). Please also provide given prompts, along with date and time (eg, a link or a screenshot).
- AI-generated text and images are not permitted, except for cases in which a manuscript is specifically about AI, or image generation and editing by AI are a part of the study design. Such exceptions will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. AI tools can be used only to paraphrase and improve manuscript writing.
- Authors should carefully review and edit AI-generated content because it can contain incorrect and biased information as well as plagiarism. Authors are responsible for all aspects of the work, including any material prepared with the use of AI.
- Referencing AI-generated material as the primary source is not acceptable. Authors should verify sources recommended by AI because they can be nonexistent and erroneous.
- Editors and reviewers should not use AI tools in their work to prevent a breach of confidentiality. Authors should also be aware that providing any data to an AI tool poses a risk of breaching confidentiality.
Founder
Scientific Research Institute – Ochapovsky Regional Clinical Hospital No. 1
Author Fees
The Journal is financed by the founder.
Publication in Innovative Medicine of Kuban is free of charge for all authors.
The Journal does not charge any submission or publication fees.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the author’s written consent.
Information or ideas obtained during the review and associated with possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Reviewers should not consider reviewing manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of authors, companies, or institutions associated with the submitted paper.
Preprint and Postprint Policy
Editors of Innovative Medicine of Kuban allow authors to publish a manuscript in the form of a preprint before its submission to the Journal as well as independently archive their articles in subject based and institutional repositories.
Preprints
Editors of Innovative Medicine of Kuban encourage authors to post preprints to preprint servers. A preprint is defined by COPE as a scholarly manuscript posted by the author(s) in an openly accessible platform, usually before or in parallel with the peer review process.
Preprint publication is not considered duplicate publication and does not affect the editor’s decision on article publication in Innovative Medicine of Kuban.
Authors should notify editors of a published preprint at the time of manuscript submission and provide a link to the preprint indicating a DOI and terms of preprint distribution.
Authors are responsible for updating a preprint record with a publication reference. The reference must include DOI and a URL link to the published version of the article on the Journal’s website. The original text of the preprint should not be changed based on reviewers and editors’ comments. The text of the preprint should not be replaced by the text of the published article.
The text of the preprint should not be deleted.
Manuscripts Accepted for Publication
Editors of Innovative Medicine of Kuban allow self-archiving of manuscripts that have been reviewed and accepted for publication.
To post such version of the article authors can use:
- personal website or blog;
- institutional repository;
- subject based repository;
or provide access to this version to professors or students for personal use.
Authors should indicate the manuscript status in the text and provide information on the date of its planned publication.
Example:
The article “Article Title” has been reviewed and accepted for publication and will be published in Innovative Medicine of Kuban (Issue 3, 2021).
After the publication of the final version of the article, authors are responsible for updating the record with a link to the published article. The posted text should not be changed based on reviewers and editors’ comments. The text of the posted version should not be replaced. The text of the posted version of the article should not be deleted.
Final Versions of Manuscripts
Editors of Innovative Medicine of Kuban allow self-archiving of manuscripts that have been reviewed, accepted for publication, and edited by the editors.
To post this version of the article authors can use:
- personal website or blog;
- institutional repository;
- subject based repository;
or provide access to this version to professors or students for personal use.
After the publication of the final version of the article, authors are responsible for updating the record with a link to the published article. The posted text should not be changed based on reviewers and editors’ comments. The text of the posted version of the article should not be replaced. The text of the posted version of the article should not be deleted.
Informed Consent Statement
Innovative Medicine of Kuban adopted the principles of the WMA Declaration of Helsinki – Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects and endeavors to ensure compliance with ethical and data collection standards for research involving human subjects. Before starting research, researchers should familiarize themselves with the Declaration of Helsinki principles regarding informed consent and conduct research in strict accordance with those principles set forth below (Articles 25-32 of the Declaration of Helsinki):
“25. Participation by individuals capable of giving informed consent as subjects in medical research must be voluntary. Although it may be appropriate to consult family members or community leaders, no individual capable of giving informed consent may be enrolled in a research study unless he or she freely agrees.
- In medical research involving human subjects capable of giving informed consent, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail, post-study provisions and any other relevant aspects of the study. The potential subject must be informed of the right to refuse to participate in the study or to withdraw consent to participate at any time without reprisal. Special attention should be given to the specific information needs of individual potential subjects as well as to the methods used to deliver the information.
After ensuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the physician or another appropriately qualified individual must then seek the potential subject’s freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing. If the consent cannot be expressed in writing, the non-written consent must be formally documented and witnessed.
All medical research subjects should be given the option of being informed about the general outcome and results of the study.
- When seeking informed consent for participation in a research study the physician must be particularly cautious if the potential subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In such situations the informed consent must be sought by an appropriately qualified individual who is completely independent of this relationship.
- For a potential research subject who is incapable of giving informed consent, the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. These individuals must not be included in a research study that has no likelihood of benefit for them unless it is intended to promote the health of the group represented by the potential subject, the research cannot instead be performed with persons capable of providing informed consent, and the research entails only minimal risk and minimal burden.
- When a potential research subject who is deemed incapable of giving informed consent is able to give assent to decisions about participation in research, the physician must seek that assent in addition to the consent of the legally authorised representative. The potential subject’s dissent should be respected.
- Research involving subjects who are physically or mentally incapable of giving consent, for example, unconscious patients, may be done only if the physical or mental condition that prevents giving informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the research group. In such circumstances the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. If no such representative is available and if the research cannot be delayed, the study may proceed without informed consent provided that the specific reasons for involving subjects with a condition that renders them unable to give informed consent have been stated in the research protocol and the study has been approved by a research ethics committee. Consent to remain in the research must be obtained as soon as possible from the subject or a legally authorised representative.
- The physician must fully inform the patient which aspects of their care are related to the research. The refusal of a patient to participate in a study or the patient’s decision to withdraw from the study must never adversely affect the patient-physician relationship.
- For medical research using identifiable human material or data, such as research on material or data contained in biobanks or similar repositories, physicians must seek informed consent for its collection, storage and/or reuse. There may be exceptional situations where consent would be impossible or impracticable to obtain for such research. In such situations the research may be done only after consideration and approval of a research ethics committee.”
Human and Animal Rights
Human Rights Policy
When reporting results of experimental research involving human participants, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed in accordance with the ethical standards of the Declaration of Helsinki. If a study was conducted without adherence to the Declaration principles, authors should justify the chosen approach to the study and guarantee that such approach was approved by an ethics committee of an institution in which the study was conducted.
Animal Rights Policy
When conducting an experimental study on animals, authors must confirm that they followed institutional and national standards for use of laboratory animals according to the Rules of Working With Experimental Animals (Annex to the Order of the USSR Ministry of Health No. 755 dated August 12, 1977).
Data Sharing Policy
Authors are encouraged to make their research data available but not required to do so. The decision to publish an article will not be affected by whether or not authors share their research data.
Definition of Research Data
This policy applies to research data that might be required to verify results of the research published in Innovative Medicine of Kuban. Research data include any recorded factual materials that are used to produce results in digital and nondigital form. This includes tabular data, code, images, audio, documents, video, maps, raw and/or processed data. Research data include data produced by authors (“primary data”) and data from other sources that are analyzed by authors in their study (“secondary data”).
Definition of Exceptions
Research data that are not required to verify the results reported in articles are not covered by this policy.
Data that are not subject to public sharing can be deposited in data repositories with limited access or preliminary anonymized. Authors can also publicly provide metadata only and/or a description of how to access data upon requests of other researchers.
Data Repositories
The preferred mechanism for sharing research data is via data repositories. Please see https://repositoryfinder.datacite.org/ to find an appropriate research data repository.
Data Citation
The editorial staff of Innovative Medicine of Kuban encourages authors to cite any publicly available research data in their reference list. Citations of data sets should include the minimum information recommended by DataCite and follow the Journal style. A standard citation includes a persistent identifier (such as a DOI), creator, title, publisher (repository), publication year, resource type.
Examples of References to Data Sets
Deng D, Yan CY, Xu C, et al. Crystal structure of the human glucose transporter GLUT1. Protein Data Bank. 2014. https://doi.org/10.2210/pdb4pyp/pdb
Wright AK, Kontopantelis E, Emsley R, et al. Life expectancy and cause-specific mortality in type 2 diabetes: a population-based cohort study quantifying relationships in ethnic subgroups. ClinicalCodes.org. 2016. https://clinicalcodes.rss.mhs.man.ac.uk/medcodes/article/56/
Data Licensing
The editorial staff of Innovative Medicine of Kuban encourages access to data under Creative Commons Licenses. The editorial staff does not insist on the obligatory use of Creative Commons in the case when data are deposited in repositories of the third party. The publisher of Innovative Medicine of Kuban does not assert any copyrights for data submitted by authors with their article.
If you have any questions regarding this policy, please contact our Executive Editor at imk-journal@mail.ru.
CrossMark Policy
CrossMark is a multi-publisher initiative from CrossRef and provides a standard way for readers to locate the authoritative version of an article or other published content. By applying the CrossMark logo, Innovative Medicine of Kuban is committed to maintaining the content it publishes and to alerting readers to changes if and when they occur.
Clicking the CrossMark icon will provide the current status of a document and may also give additional publication record information about the document.
Advertising Policy
Innovative Medicine of Kuban publishes advertisements relevant to the practice of medicine.
The Advertising Policy is developed in accordance with the Recommendations on Publication Ethics Policies for Medical Journals Prepared by the WAME Publication Ethics Committee and Federal Law on Advertising No. 38-ФЗ dated March 13, 2006.
- Editorial decisions are not influenced by advertising revenue or reprint potential.
- Editorial and advertising functions at the Journal are independent.
- Advertisers and donors have no control over editorial material under any circumstances.
- Reprinted articles are published as they originally appeared in the journal (including subsequent corrections), ie, there is no alteration or revision of articles for a supplement or reprint other than corrections.
- The content of special supplementary issues (if any) is determined only by the usual editorial process and not influenced in any way by the funding source or advertisers.
- Experts evaluate manuscripts for supplementary issues using the same procedure applied to all articles published in Innovative Medicine of Kuban.
- Advertisements should not exceed 40% of the total content of an issue.
- All advertisements should clearly identify the advertiser and the product or service being offered. In the case of drug advertisements, the full generic name of each active ingredient should appear.
- Commercial advertisements should not be placed adjacent to any editorial matter that discusses the product being advertised, nor adjacent to any article reporting research on the advertised product, nor should they refer to an article in the same issue in which they appear.
- Advertisements should have a different appearance from editorial material and the ADVERTISEMENT disclaimer at the top of each page.
- Advertisements may not be deceptive or misleading. Exaggerated or extravagantly worded copy is not allowed. Advertisements should not be indecent or offensive in either text or artwork, or contain negative content of a personal, racial, ethnic, sexual orientation, or religious character. Advertising shall be fair and truthful (Article 5, Federal Law on Advertising No. 38-ФЗ).
- Products or services being advertised should be germane to the practice of medicine, medical education, or health care delivery.
- All promotional materials shall comply with the Russian Federation legislation requirements, including those set forth in the Federal Law on Advertising (Article 5. The General Requirements Applicable to Advertising, Article 24. Advertising Medicines, Medical Articles and Medical Services, Methods of Prophylaxis, Diagnosis, Treatment and Medical Rehabilitation, Folk Medicine Methods).
- Advertisers bear full responsibility for any advertising information.
- The editorial staff of Innovative Medicine of Kuban reserves the right to refuse any advertising for any reason at its sole discretion. The decision as to acceptance is made in consultation with Editor in Chief and the Editorial Board members.
